FIP Analysis: Bonderman Better than his ERA

In an earlier post, I discussed team run prevention using FIP ERA to measure pitching performance and DER to measure fielding performance. In this post, I will evaluate the performance of individual starting pitchers using FIP ERA. There were 65 American League pitchers with 17 starts (approximately a half season) or more in 2005. The first table below lists Detroit Tiger starting pitchers in 2005 plus Kenny Rogers. The second table lists all 65 qualifiers in the league.

In both tables, ERA represents the pitcher’s actual ERA. FIP represents FIP ERA, the pitcher’s ERA based on fielding independent statistics (K,BB,HBP,HR) only. DER is the Defensive Efficiency Ratio of the team when the given pitcher was on the mound. A higher DER indicates that he received more fielding support. FIP-ERA is the difference between the pitcher’s FIP ERA and actual ERA. It tells how much the actual ERA was helped or hurt by non FIP factors. A negative number indicates that the pitcher probably pitched better than his actual ERA. A positive number says that he probably pitched worse than his actual ERA.

The tables show that Jeremy Bonderman had a FIP-ERA of -0.63 indicating that his relatively high actual ERA may have been due, in large part, to factors beyond his control. His DER (.690) was lower than any starting pitcher on the team which means that he received less fielding support than his pitching mates. While Bonderman’s actual ERA (4.57) was 41^st in the league, his FIP ERA (3.94) was 16^th. Since FIP ERA is a better predictor of future performance than actual ERA, this may bode well for next year.

On the other hand, Kenny Rogers had a much higher FIP ERA (4.11) than actual ERA (3.46). Rogers’s high DER (.714) says that he received a lot of fielding support. While his actual ERA was more than a run lower than Bonderman’s actual ERA, his FIP ERA was actually a little higher. It’s important to note that this analysis does not take ballpark into consideration. Obviously, Bonderman pitched in a more favorable environment but that’s a discussion for another time. The main point still stands. That is, Bonderman pitched better than his actual ERA and Rogers pitched worse than his actual ERA.

Jason Johnson (4.59 versus 4.39) and Mike Maroth (4.74 versus 4.69) both had FIP ERAs relatively close to their actual ERAs which says that there actual ERAs were probably pretty good indicators of their pitching performances. Nate Robertson had a FIP ERA (4.77) which was significantly higher than his actual ERA (4.48). This indicates that his pitching performance may have been overstated by his actual ERA. Robertson received the best fielding support (DER=.721) of any Tiger starting pitcher.

FIP Rnk	Name	Team	IP	ERA	FIP	DER	FIP- ERA
16	Bonderman	DET	189.0	4.57	3.94	.690	-0.63
24	Rogers	TEX	195.3	3.46	4.11	.714	0.65
31	Johnson	DET	210.0	4.54	4.39	.707	-0.16
46	Maroth	DET	209.0	4.74	4.69	.700	-0.05
47	Robertson	DET	196.7	4.48	4.77	.721	0.29
NA	Douglass	DET	87.3	5.56	4.94	.708	-0.62
NA	Ledezma	DET	49.7	7.07	6.04	.696	-1.02

FIP Rnk	Name	Team	IP	ERA	FIP	DER	FIP- ERA
1	Santana	MIN	231.7	2.87	2.84	.738	-0.04
2	Harden	OAK	128.0	2.53	2.94	.748	0.41
3	Halladay	TOR	141.7	2.41	3.08	.738	0.66
4	Lackey	LAA	209.0	3.44	3.14	.674	-0.30
5	Buehrle	CHA	236.7	3.12	3.46	.710	0.34
6	Bedard	BAL	141.7	4.00	3.53	.685	-0.47
7	Sabathia	CLE	196.7	4.03	3.73	.711	-0.29
8	Millwood	CLE	192.0	2.86	3.77	.719	0.91
9	Colon	LAA	222.7	3.48	3.79	.721	0.31
10	Kazmir	TB	186.0	3.77	3.80	.693	0.03
11	Johnson	NYA	225.7	3.79	3.82	.717	0.03
12	Lee	CLE	202.0	3.79	3.84	.723	0.05
13	Young	TEX	164.7	4.26	3.85	.709	-0.42
14	Wells	BOS	184.0	4.45	3.87	.680	-0.58
15	Haren	OAK	217.0	3.73	3.93	.713	0.20
16	Bonderman	DET	189.0	4.57	3.94	.690	-0.63
17	Byrd	LAA	204.3	3.74	3.98	.716	0.23
18	Towers	TOR	208.7	3.71	3.99	.698	0.28
19	Westbrook	CLE	210.7	4.49	4.00	.713	-0.48
20	Mussina	NYA	179.7	4.41	4.05	.678	-0.36
21	Cabrera	BAL	161.3	4.52	4.07	.709	-0.45
22	Clement	BOS	191.0	4.57	4.08	.701	-0.49
23	Garcia	CHA	228.0	3.87	4.09	.719	0.23
24	Rogers	TEX	195.3	3.46	4.11	.714	0.65
25	Park	TEX	109.7	5.66	4.19	.655	-1.47
26	Silva	MIN	188.3	3.44	4.23	.708	0.78
27	Wang	NYA	116.3	4.02	4.24	.735	0.22
28	Contreras	CHA	204.7	3.61	4.25	.742	0.64
29	Garland	CHA	221.0	3.50	4.28	.737	0.78
30	Chacin	TOR	203.0	3.72	4.30	.704	0.58
31	Johnson	DET	210.0	4.54	4.39	.707	-0.16
32	Washburn	LAA	177.3	3.20	4.39	.710	1.20
33	Zito	OAK	228.3	3.86	4.39	.757	0.52
34	Moyer	SEA	200.0	4.27	4.44	.704	0.16
35	Blanton	OAK	201.3	3.53	4.47	.752	0.94
36	Santana	LAA	133.7	4.65	4.47	.704	-0.18
37	Arroyo	BOS	205.3	4.51	4.48	.722	-0.04
38	Radke	MIN	200.7	4.04	4.48	.722	0.45
39	Pineiro	SEA	189.0	5.62	4.50	.681	-1.12
40	Saarloos	OAK	159.7	4.17	4.52	.712	0.34
41	Greinke	KC	183.0	5.80	4.53	.665	-1.27
42	Lohse	MIN	178.7	4.18	4.59	.689	0.41
43	Fossum	TB	162.7	4.92	4.61	.701	-0.32
44	Hendrickson	TB	178.3	5.90	4.67	.679	-1.23
45	Lopez	BAL	209.3	4.90	4.68	.709	-0.22
46	Maroth	DET	209.0	4.74	4.69	.700	-0.05
47	Robertson	DET	196.7	4.48	4.77	.721	0.29
48	Bush	TOR	136.3	4.49	4.79	.721	0.30
49	Ponson	BAL	130.3	6.21	4.79	.650	-1.43
50	Wakefield	BOS	225.3	4.15	4.79	.742	0.64
51	Hernandez	KC	159.7	5.52	4.87	.706	-0.65
52	Hernandez	CHA	128.3	5.12	4.92	.700	-0.20
53	Pavano	NYA	100.0	4.77	4.93	.673	0.16
54	Carrasco	KC	114.7	4.79	4.95	.701	0.16
55	Chen	BAL	197.3	3.83	4.98	.741	1.15
56	Mays	MIN	156.0	5.65	5.07	.681	-0.58
57	Franklin	SEA	190.7	5.10	5.08	.714	-0.02
58	Meche	SEA	143.3	5.09	5.09	.708	0.00
59	Elarton	CLE	181.7	4.61	5.11	.732	0.50
60	Waechter	TB	157.0	5.62	5.14	.697	-0.48
61	Lilly	TOR	126.3	5.56	5.36	.710	-0.20
62	Sele	SEA	116.0	5.66	5.36	.682	-0.31
63	Nomo	TB	100.7	7.24	5.54	.676	-1.71
64	McClung	TB	109.3	6.59	5.65	.731	-0.93
65	Lima	KC	168.7	6.99	5.75	.686	-1.24